|
Are there any minor elections still going for late primaries?
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 13:58 |
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Well the Kansas and Michigan ones were tonight. Why do they wait so long for them anyway? It seems an odd habit to keep.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2014 05:16
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:The polls were open here in Michigan from 8 to 8 iirc, and counting ballots still can take time. No, I mean, why are the primaries not held til August.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2014 05:46
|
|
|
Phone posted:Defense contractors aren't that clever. It's probably the same deal with the Space Shuttle: the F-35 needs to have parts sourced from every state because it'd be unfair otherwise. Military hardware manufacturing is the only conservative-approved form of welfare spending.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:Still, would it be both feasible and a Good Idea to have both townships contract out to a third-party nonprofit for firefighting services, as a means of combining services without having that "oh god what if the other guys bolt" fear there, or is contracting poo poo out a bad idea and I'm a fool for considering it? It's generally a better idea to create a multi-government agency, possibly under the nominal control of the state itself, for such things rather than a normal non-profit. However you're in Michigan so obviously you're not going to get anything useful at that level under the current government.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
People with weird fetishes are a hell of a captive audience.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:It's like I'm getting a preview of the next Amergin post. I think most people would still want to be able to afford more than the bare minimum of things in general.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2014 01:18
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:"Learn English or leave" - a country that had a significant number of German-primary-language schools within the last 75 years and has 40 million Spanish speakers currently What point were you trying to make here? The xenophobes hated the German speakers 75 years ago and they hate the Spanish speakers now. They see the existence of those people as a problem to be solved, because they are xenophobes. An official US Government propaganda depiction of Germans 97 years ago: 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
Boon posted:First off, you missed his point. Second, way to reference an enlistment poster decrying a country who was seen as actively aggressive and economically preeminent who we would very soon be at war with... which would seem to be counter to your lovely point. You don't understand early 20th century xenophobia very well.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
Boon posted:No I get it. It's not really any different than any other form of xenophobia conceptually. However, you seem to have missed the point again, which is that the guy you quoted was being sarcastic. Being sarcastic with the implication that xenophobes are wrong because there's a lot of the people they hate "here". When Cenophobia is wrong in and of itself.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 01:08
|
|
|
Cigar Aficionado posted:War on drugs. That would probably produce fewer human rights violations than the normal tactics of his police department, sadly.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:The Romney = Nixon comeback poo poo has been touted for a little while now. He needs to get the vice-presidency first for that.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:And finally getting rid of every last blue-dog is a bad thing? I didn't know you liked the results of the 2010 midterms!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
kaynorr posted:No, Congress does not fund this. Last I checked the legislative branch does in fact control spending on government functions.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2014 00:09
|
|
|
Wanamingo posted:Good job not reading the post, I guess? I read it just fine, try reading the chain of conversation. Please explain why you think Congress isn't needed for funding things, or why you think private funding for campaigns is going to succeed in getting an agreeable congress to you though. Let me break it down for you though: "Why should we care if congressmen disagree and people closer to the current beliefs lose (to people we definitely don't agree with)" "Because you need congress to pay for things" "Well we don't need to worry about that if magically all the center left at best rich people pay for ad campaigns that convince people in a majority of districts to vote leftist (ignoring that this would not work)" Nintendo Kid fucked around with this message at 00:38 on Aug 19, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
kaynorr posted:It's not private funding for campaigns. It's private funding for an unaffiliated (with the DNC or RNC) organization with only one goal, and that is to raise the voter turnout rate to 95%. In a midterm. How are you going to get 95% turnout from an entirely private get out the vote campaign against masses of discriminatory voting laws and people who are simply kept from valid voting due to being forced to work jobs at hours that conflict? All the transportation in the world isn't going to help the people who have to work 2 jobs on election day and are in states where attempting to circumvent those issues by getting them absentee ballots allows for the state election officials to discard such ballots with way more leeway. Like you mention hiring unemployed lawyers presumably to file suit against discriminatory voting laws - most of those cases if you started them now wouldn't be finished in time to affect the laws for the 2016 election, and in other places entrenched judicial biases would be likely to rule against you and good luck getting your appeals up to favorable judges in time.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2014 01:18
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Then let the teeth be pulled. Why do you think a solidly Republican controlled congress is good?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2014 02:58
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Countdown until the RNC's petition of support for Uber mysteriously vanishes Actually, the GOP will probably ratchet up their support over this: 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
Blorange posted:Uber corporate doesn't care about avoiding black neighborhoods. They're out to make a buck, they only care about avoiding poor neighborhoods. That map is just another example showing that racism will continue to exist so long as race correlates with wealth. Many of those white neighborhoods are poorer than many of the black/other minority neighborhoods excluded. It's racism straight up.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2014 05:15
|
|
|
It's not really an oversimplification of populism, as populism simply refers to whatever you can get a mass movement from out of regular people. Thus it's different in every combination of time period and location. Populism in the 30s was hella racist because the majority of people were hella racist.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2014 04:48
|
|
|
420DD Butts posted:How is "populism is inherently regressive due to the 30s" not a gross oversimplification of I'd say we're still too majority white and racist at the current time for a populist movement to not be pretty racist.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2014 05:19
|
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:I don't know what the going average percentage of LGBT people is, but even 10% of that is 4.5 million people. That's a fuckload of people who are directly affected by rural bigotry every day. They're either bullied or forced to stay closeted due to fear. Gay marriage doesn't fix bigotry, dude. Brannock posted:You're falling victim to corporate propaganda. The measures they use to determine which type of farms are more productive are overwhelmingly focused on monoculture farms. No poo poo a megafarm that raises only corn on their land is going to be more productive than twenty smaller farms raising exclusively corn. Economics of scale will do that! And what's the problem with that? Monocultures are the correct way to farm since it's not 1865 and there's a market that allows farmers to switch over the entire farm when it's time for rotation instead of the inconvenience of splitting up their property for zoned rotation. It's not corporate propaganda, it's simply science. Organic is a pseudoscientific money faucet for agricorps to fleece people who think they care about "good" farming. Brannock posted:I just realized that "organic" farming isn't really what I'm talking about. Buy local, buy from small farmers. Small farmers aren't necessarily organic farmers. The "organic" movement is largely crap designed to appeal to people who are trying to be conscientious but not really informed enough to make good decisions about their purchasing habits. There's also a ton of regulation and label trickery and shenanigans. Just buy local, buy local, buy local. Buying local and buying from small farmers are often worse for the environment and even for the local economy. Do not blindly buy local, only buy local when it actually makes sense. "Buy local always" like you're saying is another money-sucking marketing tool. Just as one example: if your area is great for growing wheat but terrible for growing rice, don't buy locally grown rice because it's clearly requiring extra resource input to sustain production. You always need to do your research for each and every "local" farm to ensure it's actually benefiting the world for you to choose them. BiggerBoat posted:Citation needed because I'm not certain this is true. Not saying you're wrong, I'd just like to know because the only thing I can provide on an anecdotal level is that no matter where I go, and especially in wastelands like Nebraska and Bumfuck, Iowa, I can always find the Rush Limbaugh show playing somewhere on the dial. Dude, you really have to remember that land does not equal population. You can hear Rush Limbaugh across the radio stations all over Wyoming or something, but that only reaches 500,000 at most if everyone in the state listens. Meanwhile a single radio station in a major metro can also reach 500,000 people if they only hit 5% of their listening area. Pohl posted:That isn't really true, what used to be rural is now suburbs. Not really true. Suburban land area is only about 3-5% of the country depending on how you measure things (with cities being 1%-2.5%). And it was no more than about 1% to 2% in the 50s, so rural area's only shrunken by 4% at most over that time. People VASTLY overestimate how far suburbs actually extend out. Pohl posted:Are those suburbs rural or urban? They're urban if they are part of a continuous chain of areas (although intervening large bodies of water or developed areas like industrial parks etc can be considered part of cotiguousness) of at least 500 people per square mile connected to urban centers of at least 2500 people with at least 1000 people per square mile in the core. So this includes pretty much all actual suburbs, and "suburb" areas compose roughly 40%-60% of America's urban population depnding on how you try to pin down what's "really" urban and what's "really" suburban. All census urban land fits in between 4-6% of the country's land mass, which represents a truly massive concentration of the nation's population compared to even 40 years ago. Pohl posted:At least rural and urban communities both serve a purpose, suburbs are just a god awful desecration of the earth. Look at this middle school level understanding of population. Jesus christ, we get it, you think all suburbs are exactly the same as whatever hellhole you crawled out of. But that's not how most suburbs work. effectual posted:Except the Oglala aquifer is being depleted, along with the fossil-based fertilizer, limiting how long factory farms will work. Good thing it's unneccesary to farm in areas that rely on that aquifer to feed the country. comes along bort posted:They're called exurbs. All the lovely parts of suburbs plus the worst elements of rural life without the benefits of either. Basically it's where older white people are concentrating as minorities fill up older suburbs when they're pushed out by gentrification. Notably, exurbs are almost always outside the boundaries of urban area definitions, being solidly rural. And they don't have amny people compared to normal suburbs.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2014 04:07
|
|
|
420DD Butts posted:I was more thinking Denver on up to Fort Collins. Not really thinking about Weld County specifically, considering that place is a poo poo hole. The normal natural gas industry is hardly less water/air polluting.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2014 04:51
|
|
|
The thing is that the industry also uses basically the same fluids to inject into "normal" natural gas deposits and practices the same sloppy things that end up with it spilling all over the place, and lots of natural gas pockets are naturally linked to the water table. The main thing fracking has done is to end up with a lot more natural gas stuff beign done around wealthier and more populated areas, meaning increased notice is taken of pollution as a result (especially since poorer and more rural areas often have populations unable to make themselves heard).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
SirKibbles posted:Wait. They figured how to get those useless pieces of junk in the air without crashing? They actually fly just fine. Why, they perform just as well as the 10% of the cost fighters they're replacing. 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
CannonFodder posted:Ross Perot brought back long form ads, or whatever the proper term is for purchasing an hour of airtime and busting out the charts. Infomercials.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
Hedera Helix posted:I like that the dams on the Columbia are targeted. It's not enough that the upper Willamette Valley gets hit; you also need to send a wall of water crashing down upon the survivors. It's not just that though, they're pretty major sources of power.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 05:21
|
|
|
Azipod posted:SAC's master plan for Russia was so over-targeted that they had multiple megatons tasked on footbridges in the siberian hinterland. You can only bomb Moscow so many times, soldier!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:I seem to recall some state legislature failing to outlaw bestiality because none of the lawmakers were mature enough to write it or debate it. Many states still don't have necrophilia and bestiality laws. Kansas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and North Carolina still don't have necrophilia laws. Nevada, Wyoming, New Mexico, Texas, Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, West Virginia, Ohio, New Jersey, Connecticut, New Hampshire and Vermont: all states that don't have laws against bestiality. And of course Washington didn't have any bestiality laws until after a certain famous horsefucking video.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2014 04:12
|
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:Now I really want to troll Republican legislators in some of those states because I can't imagine they're aware of this. Pretend to be an outraged Christian evangelical who is SHOCKED SHOCKED that my upstanding Republican state delegates haven't even outlawed bestiality. I'm pretty sure the good ol' farmboys are aware of bestiality. I do note that just about all states have animal cruelty laws. So obviously if you hurt an animal while fuckin' you can expect yourself some jail time for that. Google Mr Hands. A Boening engineer had a farm in Washington state where he let animals gently caress him in the rear end (he later died of injuries suffered when he let a horse gently caress him rectally)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:That sounds really unpleasant in every conceivable way. Even if it all goes according to plan and you don't die of sepsis. See the thing is he'd done that multiple times and didn't die or even get seriously injured. That's what the video of him around the internet shows, one of the cases where he straight up has a horse dick in his rear end and then the horse cums in him - he was ok after that. Though I'm sure his fellow engineers would see him acting a little disheveled when he came back to work the day after one of those.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2014 05:38
|
|
|
Cheekio posted:
The man who died is the man getting hosed by the horse in the video, and that horse was also probably the one who was involved when the fatal incident occurred several months after that video was recorded. Xibanya posted:I think most states have a law against desecrating human remains. Maybe necrophelia falls under that? Nope. In fact there's a lot of states where laws against that even barely exist. There is basically shitloads of stuff that no one in their right mind would get up to that are legal only because no one thinks they're likely enough to happen/be caught to justify a law. Like, most people don't need a law to tell them they shouldn't go break in to a fresh grave, dig up the coffin, and have a romantic encounter.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 13:58 |
|
|
Torpor posted:That is so American it hurts. She barely got a seat on the nonpartisan city council in what is one of the most left-tolerant cities in America, and doesn't even have the kind of support needed to make Mayor. She's not going to be able to grab a US Senate seat in Washington State, and she'd even be unlikely to get a US House seat (since both Seattle districts go into neighboring towns).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2014 05:39
|
|